Sobeh wrote:for a long time in my practice I was under the impression that one sat on the first tetrad until jhana, whereupon one explored the other anapanasati tetrads solely within a jhana state. This is simply false, and it is all I am trying to show.

Okay. I agree completely. Which is why I mentioned earlier in this post that translating pīti solely as "rapture" isn't a very helpful translation.

Re : previous posts concerning piti. I actually understand it better in my own practice as gladness or pamojja (a mental quality ) giving rise to piti (a physical and mental experience). Perhaps the mental part of piti could be likened to heightened gladness. The piti then giving rise to sukha a physical & mental experience. Like I said this is just how I understand it within my own practice. I would be interested if anybody could provide sutta evidence that piti is actually only a mental quality as described in the commentaries.

legolas wrote:Re : previous posts concerning piti. I actually understand it better in my own practice as gladness or pamojja (a mental quality ) giving rise to piti (a physical and mental experience). Perhaps the mental part of piti could be likened to heightened gladness. The piti then giving rise to sukha a physical & mental experience. Like I said this is just how I understand it within my own practice. I would be interested if anybody could provide sutta evidence that piti is actually only a mental quality as described in the commentaries.

Hi Legolas,

I'd suggest that it's really just a question of the designation (i.e. labeling) of what is being experienced.

Seeing that the five hindrances have been abandoned within him, gladness is born. Gladdened, joy is born. With a joyful mind, his body becomes tranquil. His body tranquil, he experiences pleasure. Feeling pleasure, his mind becomes concentrated.

This implies that pīti is a heightened mental quality related to and arising from gladness (pāmojja). With the onset of pīti the body becomes tranquil (kāyo passambhati), and when the body is tranquil one experiences pleasure (passaddhakāyo sukhaṃ vedeti).

With a joyful mind, his body becomes tranquil. His body tranquil, he experiences pleasure. Feeling pleasure, his mind becomes concentrated. He reflects thus: ‘The purpose for which I directed my mind has been achieved. Let me now withdraw it.’ So he withdraws his mind and does not think or evaluate. He understands: ‘Without directed thought and evaluation, internally mindful, I am [experiencing] pleasure.’

Yes, its definitely a personal internal map. As far as experiences go for the "sutta jhana" I would hesitatingly suggest that most peoples experience follows a similar path, it is the labels we use and how we relate to the experiences that differ.

I've been thinking about this thread quite a lot since Geoff invited me to comment. I've not read the entire thread. Forgive me if I cover material that's already been brought up.

I suppose the reason this has taken a lot of thought is that although I've been practicing for approaching 10 years, Jhana has never been something I consciousnly cultivated nor thought about to a great extent. Nor have I had a very clear idea of the definition of the various Jhanas and how, if at all, they related to what I experienced on the cushion. There is no doubt that it is significant in the Suttas, and of course I'm aware of samatha as an aspect of meditation, however my background in Zen (even though the root of the word 'Zen' is 'Jhana') and in secular mindfulness meditation (using techniques from the Vipassana/Insight Meditation tradition) it has never been a specific goal. Also, I consider myself a relative beginner when it comes to the Nikayas. So, this is not 'Jhāna According to the Pāḷi Nikāyas' so much as 'Jhāna According to my experience of meditation in various traditions'.

I have experienced all three of the states described here:

(i) attention training where one absorbs into a single object and thereby stills all mental factors to the point where, as Ajahn Brahmavamso explains, “Consciousness is so focused on the one thing that the faculty of comprehension is suspended … there is no comprehension of what is going on.”

(ii) attention training where one attends to a single object and thereby calms and unifies all mental factors to the point where, as Leigh Brasington explains, “It is possible to examine the experience because the state is so stable and self sustaining on its own.”

(iii) attention training where one attends to whatever occurs in the present moment (either with the aid of a support object such as abdominal movement, or choiceless awareness without the aid of a support object).

Putting aside visualisation for now, I see meditation as divided into two main types:

'Concentrated': where attention is directed towards a specific phenomenon at a time, usually in a sustained way, for example Mindfulness of Breathing
'Open': where attention is on present moment experience, but not limited to any one phenomenon or type of phenomenon, for example, Shikantaza, Choiceless Awareness

There is also a varying extent to which experience is absorbed or to which we open it to 'meta-cognition' - a sort of 'spaciousness' or 'detached awareness' which can allow us to recognise or understand truths about our experiences.

So...

(i) above is absorbed concentration.
(ii) is concentrated meditation with meta-cognition
(iii) is open awareness

As I see it

(i) is the type of meditation most conducive to Samatha and to Jhana. I think 'Samadhi' also refers to such states. I see Jhana as an altered state of conciousness, a type of trance state even, in which the quality of absorbed concentration is very high. I have not perceived a great deal of value in such states as they are necessarily impermanent. Although they may be highly blissful or tranquil, unless there is some kind of 'learning' or lasting insight to prompt a permanent shift in one's relation to experience then any 'benefit' is necessarily short-lived. It may help with concentration skills. And insights may naturally arise from it. It has never been my goal to attain rebirth among "the gods of Brahma's retinue".
(ii) is most conducive to insight/Vipassana, as there is a 'space' for making observations about one's own experience
(iii) is Choiceless Awareness or Silent Illumination/Shikantaza type zazen. I see this as having aspects of both Samatha and Vipassana ie. absorbtion and meta-cognition.

Reading descriptions of Jhana in the suttas I recognise them in my own practice to some extent at least. However, I recognise that in Theravada it's considered bad manners or bad practice to talk about one's own experiences in such a way lest it be taken as bragging about attainments. I don't see what is being described as four distinct states, but as increasingly absorbed concentration which is classified into four levels according to defining characteristics ('nimitta').

The writer (DarkDream) makes an extraordinarily good case for the interpretation that he adheres to. It is very similar to the case that I have endeavored to bring to light with regard to the interpretation of just what constitutes jhana as it has been described by others, both ancient and contemporary, as compared against one's own evolving experience of the phenomena. The thought that the description of the four jhanas are, as much as anything else, just a mnemonic device describing four different stages of one overall process makes a lot of sense to me and is something that I am able to confirm from my own experience.

The Pali word jhāna is often encountered in the suttas within the context of the four jhānas or mental techniques the Buddha used as a vehicle for awakening.

The word jhāna has been frequently translated in English as “absorption” which connotes a technical mental technique that is extremely focused.

The word jhāna is based on the Sanskrit word dhyana that contains the root dhi meaning to “reflect, conceive and ponder over”. Surprisingly, this definition appears closer to the English word “meditation” than the traditional idea of "absorption".

Interestingly, there are instances in the the Pali Canon that support the idea of jhāna as a general form of meditation. There are multiple passages in the canon where the Buddha says, “jhayatha bhikkhave” (here), which translates much more intelligibly as “monks, meditate” instead of “monks, attain absorption.”

Even so, the overwhelming occurrence of the word jhāna in the suttas is used in a more technical sense of a specific form of meditation. The almost exclusivity of jhāna in the technical sense is somewhat of an illusion. Due to a small set of stock passages related to the four jhānas being repeated throughout the Pali Canon, the reader is left with the impression that jhāna has primarily a technical meaning that is often associated with absorption.

Not surprisingly, the Buddhist tradition has focused a lot of attention on the technical meaning of jhāna: its characteristics, how it is attained, the benefit and so on.

Historically, the attainment of jhānas has become increasingly difficult to obtain as time has passed since the Buddha’s death. Today, most of the Theravada orthodoxy proclaims that the attainment of the first jhāna, let alone other higher jhānas, can only be gained with difficulty by experienced meditators.

Whatever is the truth of the difficulty of obtaining jhānas, the Buddhist tradition, for the most part, has universally agreed that the jhānas are a series of discreet mental processes that progress in order from a lower jhāna to a higher one.

This assumption seems a very reasonable one given the fact that the jhānas are number from one to four and are always described in the same order. However, as I will try to show, this numbering may have been simply a helpful memorization device rather than a means of communicating four quite distinct processes.

I will argue in the following posts by examining key suttas of the Pali Canon and contemporary descriptions of personal experiences of jhānathat what is labeled as the four jhānas is actually a description of one meditative process that has four different stages.

It is unfortunate that the idea that the 4 jhanas are a mnemonic is even floating about. In my experience the phenomena comes before the lable- ie - there are 4 separate labels because there are 4 distinct states of consciousness which the yogi absorbs into quite suddenly. There is a distinct and sharp demarcation between one jhana and the next.

Thank you very much for pointing this out. Personally, that interpretation clears a lot of things up. Also gives an explanation of why so many have found jhanic absorption nigh impossible to reach for so long that is far better than the degenerate age theory, in my opinon.

Also, I find it qute ironic that the author made his case partly through references to Ajahn Brahmavamso.

To attain jhana it takes about 3, 1 hour sitting a day, for a lay person, over period of weeks and months. Often this difficult for lay people (understably). However this should not be taken to mean that after having tried with less amounts of viriya-determination, the solution, is to alter the meaning of the Pali terms to suit a more leisurely approach to the matter. It is 'pseudo-gold' like this which will destroy the Buddha's teaching.

'There is no disappearance of the true Dhamma as long as a counterfeit of the true Dhamma has not arisen in the world, but there is the disappearance of the true Dhamma when a counterfeit of the true Dhamma has arisen in the world. Just as there is no disappearance of gold as long as a counterfeit of gold has not arisen in the world, but there is the disappearance of gold when a counterfeit of gold has arisen in the world, in the same way there is no disappearance of the true Dhamma as long as a counterfeit of the true Dhamma has not arisen in the world, but there is the disappearance of the true Dhamma when a counterfeit of the true Dhamma has arisen in the world.[1]

"It's not the earth property that makes the true Dhamma disappear. It's not the water property... the fire property... the wind property that makes the true Dhamma disappear.[2] It's worthless people who arise right here [within the Sangha] who make the true Dhamma disappear. The true Dhamma doesn't disappear the way a boat sinks all at once.

"These five downward-leading qualities tend to the confusion and disappearance of the true Dhamma. Which five? There is the case where the monks, nuns, male lay followers, & female lay followers live without respect, without deference, for the Teacher. They live without respect, without deference, for the Dhamma... for the Sangha... for the Training... for concentration. These are the five downward-leading qualities that tend to the confusion and disappearance of the true Dhamma.

Calling it "pseudo-gold" in an effort to illustrate a point to me is pointless because there is no "real gold" for it to contrast with, as I see it. The absorptions may be a widely accpted idea, but to me the suttas do not explicitly describe jhanas as such. It's up for interpretation and simply restating the counterargument isn't going to have any effect.

Also, practice does not involve any less viriya without the absorptions, nor is it any more "leisurely". Absorption states have actually always struck me as a leisurely solution, which is why I was predisoposed to agree with the article.

The reasons that you have quoted these suttas are not clear to me. I can only assume that you think I am speaking counterfeit Dhamma and that I don't have proper respect for a teacher, the Dhamma, Sangha, training or concentration.

I see you put "concentration" in bold. Absorption states and concentration are not absolutely synonymous, if that's what you're getting at.

The Buddha called counterfeit dhamma fools gold and there is nothing that concretely states that my view is counterfeit dhamma.

I'm not trying to say that your stance is wrong and that my stance is right. There isn't enough scriptural evidence that can satisfy proof for that, or for that matter satisfy that you are right and I am wrong. This is the point I'm trying to make. All you're doing is accusing me of being incorrect without any solid evidence. As such, I'd just like us to stop pretending that this exchange actually has the capacity to lead anywhere. This discussion board deserves actual debates that are reinforced with references rather than exchanges that simply involve repetitive statements of views.

My aplogies if any of this comes off as unwarrantedly accusatory. I'm just telling it as I see it.

I was going to say something about this discussion, but this is worth repeating:

darvki wrote:I'm not trying to say that your stance is wrong and that my stance is right. There isn't enough scriptural evidence that can satisfy proof for that, or for that matter satisfy that you are right and I am wrong. This is the point I'm trying to make. All you're doing is accusing me of being incorrect without any solid evidence. As such, I'd just like us to stop pretending that this exchange actually has the capacity to lead anywhere. This discussion board deserves actual debates that are reinforced with references rather than exchanges that simply involve repetitive statements of views.

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

None. I don't think this discussion has the potential for any real resolution. That's my point.

I don't understand why you chose to debate views on absorptions. No harm done, obviously, but one can't refute an intepretation with another when the very existence of the different interpretations comes from a lack of utter explicitness in the source.

I think it is weakness of Buddhism that it is tolerant and 'anything goes' attitude is allowed to ferment, often at the cost of the teachings becoming something other than what was intended. Historically it has been shown that this is one of the leading causes of destruction of Buddhism in lands where it existed previously.